View Poll Results: How Many wins will the Phillies Big 4 get next year?

Voters
39. You may not vote on this poll
  • 0-47

    0 0%
  • 48-55

    2 5.13%
  • 56-64

    10 25.64%
  • 65-70

    9 23.08%
  • 71-77

    10 25.64%
  • 78-84

    4 10.26%
  • 85 or more

    4 10.26%
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 64

Thread: Over and Under Wins Phillies Big 4

  1. #21
    I Like Avery over Neagle despite any stats they put up (personal preference)

    Avery threw hard Neagle was a junk baller
    1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
    2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
    3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,089
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    I Like Avery over Neagle despite any stats they put up (personal preference)

    Avery threw hard Neagle was a junk baller
    Maddux and Glavine were also junkballers. Their fastballs topped out around 88. Maddux might have thrown a bit harder.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cougar View Post
    "Read at your own risk. Baseball Fever shall not be responsible if you become clinically insane trying to make sense of this post. People under 18 must read in the presence of a parent, guardian, licensed professional, or Dr. Phil."

  3. #23
    neagle was not in their league

    124 wins and a career 4.24 era

    Quote Originally Posted by nerfan View Post
    Maddux and Glavine were also junkballers. Their fastballs topped out around 88. Maddux might have thrown a bit harder.
    1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
    2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
    3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Anderson, SC
    Posts
    11,935
    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    neagle was not in their league

    124 wins and a career 4.24 era
    Avery wasn't in their league either; 96 career wins and a 4.19 ERA. What's your point?

  5. #25
    follow the thread

    I chose Avery over Neagle the other three were the same

    I said I like Avery's fast ball vs Neagles junk

    the other poster said Maddux and glavine were junkballers too

    I said neagle may throw similar pitches to the hall of famers he aint in their league

    it goes back to neagle vs avery

    i prefer avery

    pretty easy to follow point if you follow the thread

    and espn and mlb network both prefer the 1993 braves starters




    Quote Originally Posted by SamtheBravesFan View Post
    Avery wasn't in their league either; 96 career wins and a 4.19 ERA. What's your point?
    1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
    2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
    3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    6,374
    Blog Entries
    1
    It seems in any sport, whenever a 'dream team' of stars is assembled for an entire season, it always ends up in disappointment. Remember when Belle and Thomas were supposed to be the next Ruth and Gehrig? Remember a few years back the Tigers were supposed to break the record for runs scored? Remember the Lakers had Kobe, Shaq, Malone, and Payton? The problem, is we tend to think best case scenerio, and assume all the guys will match the best season the ever had. Off seasons happen. Injuries happen. Three of thesee guys are 30+ years old, and Halladay has pitched a ton of innings every year. The odds are that at least one of them, probably two, will have an off year ( did Glavine, Maddux and Smoltz ever all have great full seasons in the same year?)
    That said, I like Oswalt the best out of the three; he is a safe bet to win 20, perhaps 25. Halladay I see getting hurt, and Lee I think will fall off a cliff. Hammels has great potential and could surprise by being the second best of the three. I think am guessing around 65 wins between the three.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    6,374
    Blog Entries
    1
    I don't think Oswalt needs the Phillies bats to improve in order to win 20. He was 7-1 in about a third of the season with them last year.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    25,627
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by nerfan View Post
    The 2011 Giants have at least a 25% chance of being better than the Phillies. Age is on their side, as their top 4 have ages of 26, 27, 28, and 21. Lincecum had a DOWN year last year. Bumgarner can only get better. Sanchez is an area of question for me, though.
    Jonathan is an enigma to me. He did pitch better in 2010 than he ever did. But I think he is high wire act. He walks a ton (led the NL), and gave up 21 HRs (a somewhat high number). But he also has swing and miss stuff. He had 205 Ks (8th in NL), 9.54 K/9 (3rd in NL), .204 BAA (led NL), .343 SLG (8th in NL), 6.6 H/9 (led NL), 3.07 ERA (13th in NL), and a 133 ERA+ (9th in NL). If Sanchez can cut down on the walks he could really be something.
    Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 12-16-2010 at 12:26 AM.
    Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

  9. #29
    You think Oswalt is going to have a 1.82 ERA over a full season??

    I dont

    Quote Originally Posted by willshad View Post
    I don't think Oswalt needs the Phillies bats to improve in order to win 20. He was 7-1 in about a third of the season with them last year.
    1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
    2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
    3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Posts
    2,082
    I'll just wait for the season to start. A lot can happen to derail a team's chances.
    RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010).

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Anderson, SC
    Posts
    11,935
    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    follow the thread

    I chose Avery over Neagle the other three were the same

    I said I like Avery's fast ball vs Neagles junk

    the other poster said Maddux and glavine were junkballers too

    I said neagle may throw similar pitches to the hall of famers he aint in their league

    it goes back to neagle vs avery

    i prefer avery

    pretty easy to follow point if you follow the thread
    I was following the thread, and I saw you say that. I inferred the wrong thing from that part of the conversation. If you want to prefer Avery because he had a decent fastball, that's fine by me.

    and espn and mlb network both prefer the 1993 braves starters
    Well, I believe they're both wrong. I'm perfectly willing to disagree with Jayson Stark and espeically the MLB Network.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Florissant, Mo.
    Posts
    24,781
    Quote Originally Posted by SamtheBravesFan View Post
    MLB.com isn't exactly the pinnacle of historical research of baseball statistics. Just because the rotation has two 20-game winners doesn't mean that it's the best. Glavine led the team with 22 wins, but he was their worst starter outside of Pete Smith.

    Again, I prefer 1997 or 1998.
    Right, but when your 2nd worst starter has an ERA+ near 130 with over 240 IP - that is pretty darned historic.

    I will say this- when you look at the quality of defensive range behind the pitchers, the 1997 team had some very good defense and the 1993 team had really, really great defense. The 1996 team's range (DER) was dead-average. 1996 may have been the year in which independent from their defense, the Braves' staff was best.

    And really, 1993 or 1997, etc. The Braves staff was unreal. The Phils (or Giants) could duplicate any of those years, but they haven't yet.
    Last edited by Bothrops Atrox; 12-16-2010 at 10:00 AM.
    1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

    1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

    1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


    The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
    The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Anderson, SC
    Posts
    11,935
    Quote Originally Posted by STLCards2 View Post
    Right, but when your 2nd worst starter has an ERA+ near 130 with over 240 IP - that is pretty darned historic.

    I will say this- when you look at the quality of defensive range behind the pitchers, the 1997 team had some very good defense and the 1993 team had really, really great defense. The 1996 team's range (DER) was dead-average. 1996 may have been the year in which independent from their defense, the Braves' staff was best.

    And really, 1993 or 1997, etc. The Braves staff was unreal. The Phils (or Giants) could duplicate any of those years, but they haven't yet.
    It's a matter of slight degrees. I look at the 1997 and 1998 rotations and I view it as slightly better because of the ERA+s.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,700
    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    The Philadelphia Inquirer points out that the last five teams that had at least four 15-game winners in its starting rotation all failed to win the World Series: 1993 Braves, 1998 Braves, 2001 Mariners, 2003 Yankees and 2004 Cardinals.
    All of those teams, however, reached the World Series (with the notable exception of the record-setting '01 Mariners). And, as we all know, reaching the Series necessary if you're going to win it.
    "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
    "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
    "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
    "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

  15. #35
    some random things I heard on the radio or saw on the internet or saw on TV (from pundits or fans)

    1. Championships are not won in December or January, you still have to play the games

    2. The Phillies staff with their ages and pitching in Philly are not in a better position than the Giants and their ages pitching in ATT

    3. Numerous quotes including one just heard on the radio from Philly radio icon Tony Bruno "the staff will be pitching in a bandbox 81 games a year"

    4. Cant believe the Phillies paid 24 million a year for a barely over .500 pitcher (last 2 years 26-22) who wins 13 games a year

    5. Would the Phillies have done this deal if they had beaten the Giants last year?

    really interesting stuff and great hot stove fun
    Last edited by 9RoyHobbsRF; 12-19-2010 at 10:35 AM.
    1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
    2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
    3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

  16. #36
    I will add for those who dispute the term bandbox,

    is the Phillies stadium friendlier to hitters or pitchers???
    1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
    2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
    3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    14,506
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    I will add for those who dispute the term bandbox,

    is the Phillies stadium friendlier to hitters or pitchers???
    depends.......

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    340
    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    some random things I heard on the radio or saw on the internet or saw on TV (from pundits ot fans)

    1. Championships are not won in December or January, you still have to play the games

    2. The Phillies staff with their ages and pitching in Philly are not in a better position than the Giants and their ages pitching in ATT

    3. Numerous quotes including one just heard on the radio from Philly radio icon Tony Bruno "the staff will be pitching in a bandbox 81 games a year"

    4. Cant believe the Phillies paid 24 million a year for a barely over .500 pitcher (last 2 years 26-22) who wins 13 games a year

    5. Would the Phillies have done this deal if they had beaten the Giants last year?

    really interesting stuff and great hot stove fun
    1. Obviously, but this rotation makes them a playoff favorite. No harm in discussing it now.

    2. Madison Bumgarner (hasn't played a full season...) and Jonathan Sanchez (first good season was in 2010) are not proven pitchers. All 4 of the Phillies starters are proven and their least proven (Hamels) has already had 3 very good years. You'd be crazy to take Sanchez or Bumgarner over any of the Phils top 4 at this point. Their age will catch up to them in the future and the Giants are clearly the rotation you want for the next 5 years, but age likely won't affect them much in 2011. Obviously the Giants numbers will be helped by their ballpark compared to the Phils, so ERA+ will be more important than straight up ERA this year.

    3. True... Halladay, Oswalt and Hamels didn't seem to have a problem with that last year though.

    4. Wins? Seriously?

    5. I don't think so, but it's interesting to think about.
    Last edited by kiluckzle; 12-16-2010 at 01:43 PM.

  19. #39
    ^
    ask the Rangers how good Bumgarner was

    in fact the only pitcher that the Giants won all of their post season starts was Bumgarner, not bad for a 20-21 year old

    and I believe Sanchez led the league in lowest BA against

    the Rangers led the world in hitting and lost three games scoring 0, 0 and 1 run, 2 of the games using the DH, the one game they won they scored all of 4 runs, three of the runs coming on a rather fluke 3 run homer
    (a rookie with previous no HR vs LH pitcher)

    I like the Phillies rotation, although it has some gray hairs

    and their offense is dependent upon an aging team staying healthy which has not been the case recently and somehow replacing their only decent RH bat

    time will tell
    Last edited by 9RoyHobbsRF; 12-16-2010 at 02:01 PM.
    1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
    2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
    3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,089
    Quote Originally Posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    I am going to lean closer to the 77 best case wins and go with 73
    Then you'd be crazy not to bet.

    Via BoDog.com:

    Total Regular Season Wins for the Phillies in 2011 -- Over/Under: 96
    Cliff Lee Total Wins in 2011 Regular Season -- Over/Under: 17
    Total Wins by Phillies Big 4 (Lee, Halladay, Oswalt & Hamels) in 2011 Regular Season -- Over/Under: 61
    Last edited by ipitch; 12-16-2010 at 02:00 PM.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •